Dr. Michael Behe on theistic evolution

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama – My intent was to give you a synopsis of Dr. Michael Behe’s presentation on theistic evolution, but I woke up Friday morning with a migraine, which, despite medication, only got worse.

As a result I spent most of the day in bed, praying that I would be well enough to drive an hour to hear him at 7 p.m. I awoke after 6 p.m. and decided I would be able to make the trip, but I would get there late. As it turns out, I missed about three-fourths of his talk.

I’m sure you can read much of his story at his webpage on the Lehigh University website, and also, Fixed Point Foundation is selling audio and video versions of the conference, so both you and I will be able to hear his entire talk once those are mailed out.

I think it's generally safe to say that Behe sees the complexity in creation demanding an engineer with a purpose rather than it being the result of random mutations.

When I finally made my way into the audience, Behe was talking about travelling with a friend and looking at a mountain range. “Look at that slope,” he tells the friend. “From that mountain top to the other one is an angle of 19 degrees!”

“Yeah, so what?” his friend asks.

Next they travel to see Massachusetts’ Old Man in the Mountain formation. Behe notices how the rocks resemble a human face and wonders if perhaps they were designed my some primitive culture.

Finally, they arrive at Mount Rushmore, seeing the perfectly chiseled faces of four U.S. presidents. The slope from the top to bottom of George Washington’s nose clearly was formed by a designer.

Even noted atheist Richard Dawkins admits the “appearance” of a purposeful arrangement of parts in even some of the most simple of life forms, Behe said.

Behe coined the term “irreducible complexity” for his theory, likening it to a mousetrap, which has several components necessary to make it work. If you remove half the components, he said, “you won’t get a mousetrap that works half as well. It won’t work a fourth as well. It’s a broken mousetrap.”

Behe finds it amazing so many biologists would latch on to Darwin’s theory. “The bottom line: There is strong evidence for design, little evidence for Darwinism.”

Radio host Rick Burgess closed out the evening, noting that he, too, is an Oxford graduate. He got his high school diploma from Oxford High School in Oxford, Ala.

“I’m going to ask a question I’ll bet none of these men with Ph.D.s asked,” Burgess said. “I read Genesis and I wonder stuff like: What if, instead of a snake, it had been a giraffe that tempted Eve in the garden. Can you image giraffes with no legs? What if you saw a legless giraffe out in the garden and hollered, ‘Honey, bring me a shovel or hoe!’ then tried to cut that long neck off?”

Turning serious, Burgess said that while it’s good to engage in debates such as the origin of may, Christians shouldn’t make it a litmus test for salvation.

The conference concludes on Saturday, with Q&A sessions with Behe, young earth (or biblical) creationist Dr. Terry Mortenson and old earth creationist Dr. Hugh Ross, a roundtable discussion among all three, a sermon on Genesis 1 from Gilbert Lennox and a concert by modern hymn writers Keith and Kristyn Getty.

You should follow me on Twitter here and Facebook here.

Photo: Owen Tew

Terry Mortenson, Hugh Ross on new, old earth creation

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama -- Dr. Terry Mortenson presented the case for young earth creationism, and Dr. Hugh Ross made the argument for old earth creationism at Fixed Point Foundation's conference Thursday night at Briarwood Presbyterian Church.

The third night of "In the Beginning: 3 Views on Creation," continues tonight with Dr. Michael Behe arguing for theistic evolution. Fixed Point Executive Director Larry Taunton noted that all speakers agree on the authority of the Bible, they just have different interpretations of the text.

Though Christians disagree on the details of the universe's origins, it's vital they engage the culture, Taunton said, because "whoever gets to tell the creation story -- they are the priests of our society."

Mortenson, pictured above, of Answers in Genesis, said the earth and universe were created in six 24-hour days about 6,000 years ago. He took exception with others who argue that the "days" mentioned in Genesis 1 might be long epochs. The literary form in Genesis is narrative, he said, not poetry, parable or prophecy, meaning it was to be taken as literal history.

"That was Jesus' view, and all the other biblical writers treat it as history," he said.

Mortenson, who said he didn’t grow up believing in a 6,000-year-old earth, said Genesis 1-11 is vital to the Christian doctrine of salvation. “Genesis is foundational to the rest of the Bible.” He said parts of the world where the church has accepted evolution have gone on to reject other biblical doctrines as well.

The previous night, Dr. John Lennox had argued that other creatures might have lived and died long before man came along, but didn’t see “decay” that entered the world after the fall of man. Mortenson said fossils have shown that dinosaurs had cancer, so if they existed millions of years before man, they did see decay.

Mortenson said the layers of sediment seen in the Grand Canyon don’t represent millions of years of deposits followed by millions more of erosion. They point to a cataclysmic event: Noah’s flood. He pointed to an atheist scientist who had reached the same conclusion about a deposit in England.

Secular scientists, and some Christian ones, get false results because they are using the wrong lens, he said, just as if he looks through the bottom of his bifocals he would presume members of the audience have heads, but no eyeballs. Looking through the top of the top lens, he can see more clearly. Most Christians who don't believe in his view haven't closely examined the evidence, he said.

Ross, of Reasons to Believe (pictured left), described his view as “constructive integration.” “The Bible and science can be completely integrated,” he said. “God has given us two books: the book of science and the Bible.”

Ross grew up secular, but at the age of 17 decided the complexity he saw in nature demanded a creator. He read the scriptures of all the major religions, finding only the Jewish/Christian texts describing creation the way science does.

The space-time theorem states that the universe began with a singularity, but it had to have an outside causal agent. That agent, Ross said, is God.

While Genesis provides an account of creation, Ross says the Bible contains 27 separate accounts of the universe’s origins. Genesis doesn’t say what God did between creating the universe and man, but elsewhere such things are explained, including his stretching out of the heavens. Science wouldn’t discover the universe is expanding for thousands of years.

Ross rejects young earth creationism, but does believe that God created creatures as they are today; he didn’t use the process of evolution. “There’s been no discernible change in human DNA in 25,000 years,” he said, adding that on average one new species appeared on earth until man showed up. Since then there have been zero.

He said Genesis 1 is written from the perspective of the earth, and that’s why light appears before the sun and moon. The earth was previously covered in clouds, as Venus still is. After God removed the permanent canopy of clouds, photosynthesis could occur, allowing plants to grow.

Ross believes Adam was on the earth a long time before Eve was created. Part of that reason, when Adam first saw his wife he exclaimed, in Hebrew, happa ‘am (At long last!)

Ross said it’s important to find a creation model that synthesizes the Bible with science or it will be impossible to win skeptics over. “If skeptics can’t get past the first page of the Bible, they aren’t likely to get to John 3:16.”

You should follow me on Twitter here and Facebook here.

Photos: Owen Tew

John Lennox on creationism, and my slip with a banana peel

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama

“Do you have a place I can throw away this banana peel?”

That was me creating my usual good first impression as I entered Briarwood Presbyterian Church to hear John Lennox (pictured right), the first of six speakers at Fixed Point Foundation’s “In the Beginning” conference on three views of the Genesis account of creation.

The young woman to whom I spoke didn’t have a trash can but pulled out a box top with some scrap paper in it and had me deposit the remains of my supper-by-commute in there. Next, she found the lanyard with my name on it which would grant me access to the event.

After finding a men’s room, which, of course, contained a trash can, I sheepishly made my way back to the Will Call desk and begged her let me put the banana peel in a more appropriate place. As you can see, I have not been blessed with elegance.

I had contemplated bringing, rather than a banana peel, my camera to take decent pictures to illustrate this post, but feared “good photography” might not be allowed since I wasn’t attending as an accredited member of the press. So you are stuck with lousy cellphone shots.

I was way early, and got a seat front row, center. At least I’d be as close as possible for those lousy shots. I guess most of the attendees were Baptist since it was quite a while before anyone else joined me on the front row. When someone did, he introduced himself, and said he was from Huntsville, which is about 100 miles to the north.

Huntsville, Alabama is a space and defense industry hub, and sure enough this guy was semi-retired from the business. “You’re a rocket scientist, eh? Not me. I just gave the woman at Will Call a banana peel – THEN TOOK IT BACK.” I didn’t say that, but I probably will if I see him again tonight. There’ll probably be a brain surgeon from UAB sitting on the other side of me.

My neighbor suddenly thought to turn off his cellphone, then I told him way more than he cared to hear about mine – including the fear I’ll forget to put it on vibrate in church one day and it will go off to my ringtone of the old Emergency Squad 51 call.

God eventually showed the rocket man mercy and allowed the event to begin. Husband-and-wife duet Keith and Kristyn Getty kicked things off with a few hymns, some of which they wrote themselves. You can see the rotten cellphone photo at left that makes them appear as angels in their brightness; actually, it’s just overexposure. Though their singing and piano was indeed heavenly. I think they said Kristyn is John Lennox’s niece.

Lennox took the stage next. His purpose was to give an overview of the three views that will be presented over the next two nights: young earth creationism, old earth creationism and theistic evolution. Give-and-take among the views will be Saturday.

But Lennox added his own view: something in between. Noting that there are multiple interpretations for the word “day” in most languages, he pointed out that Genesis 1 says that God spoke things into creation and there was “evening and morning.” Young earthers say this proves the six days of creation are literal 24-hour periods. Old earthers and evolutionists say “days” refer to epochs. But Lennox posits that both could be true. That is, God spoke certain things into creation on an actual day, but “it might have taken a long time for what he said to work themselves out.”

Problems with his theory? One is the Bible’s claim that man’s sin in the Garden of Eden brought death. Lennox says that perhaps man’s sin brought death only to mankind, not animals and plants. But it brought decay and disease to all creation. A daffodil can get a disease and die, he explained, but if a daffodil blooms, then later dies out for the year, only to rise up again the next spring, that isn’t though of as disease or decay. It’s part of the natural cycle of the plant.

Lennox said he’s looking forward to hearing the other speakers – and perhaps even hearing them refute his theory. He admitted he might well be completely wrong. “I’m not willing to die for it,” he said, joking, “though some of you wish I would.”

Taking the Bible literally doesn’t mean that nothing should be seen as symbolic, Lennox noted. For instance, no one thinks that when Jesus said “I am the door” he meant he was an actual wooden door. “It’s because you have experience with doors.”

The Oxford mathematics professor said he got onto theology after one of his early students at Cambridge asked him whether he believed in God, then added, “Of course you do; you’re Irish. You believe in God, and you fight about it.”

The young man was making two common assumptions that Lennox didn’t care for: “He was saying my belief in God is genetically determined, and secondly, that it leads to violence.”

Lennox urged Christians, no matter what their view of creation, not to turn people off from faith by being overly dogmatic. He noted how Copernicus’ assertion that the earth circles the sun and not vice-versa wasn’t accepted by science or the church at first. And that debate was as hot as “creationism” is now. If the earth wasn’t the center of the universe it messed up the theology that the earth was important to God.

“The earth doesn’t have to be at the center of the physical universe for it to be at the center of God’s attention,” Lennox said.

Scripture talks about the origins of the universe, but it isn’t a science textbook, he said. “In Genesis, God encourages man to find things out for himself.”

He noted that many theologians of centuries past questioned whether the universe was created in six 24-hour days, among them Augustine, Justin Martyr and Origen. “And they weren’t influenced by contemporary geology.”

Lennox urged attendees to listen with respect to all points of view at the conference, even if their minds aren’t changed. He especially pointed out evolutionary biologist Michael Behe, who is taking a risk in his field by rejecting Darwinian evolution. “I am a mathematician, and I challenge it, too,” he said, “but not at the cost a biologist does.”

Fixed Point Executive Director Larry Taunton said he put the conference together because often in churches only one view is heard. “If you aren’t willing to submit yourself to some scrutiny within the church … I can assure you you’ll face some difficulty outside the church,” he said.

Oh, and my cellphone? It did go off with a call for Gage and DeSoto. I must have turned it off vibrate when I was taking one of those crummy pictures. Happily, I also accidentally turned the ring volume down to 1, which is 6 quieter than full blast.

It was my wife. When I called back she said a turtle was in the garage and she couldn’t coax it out. “Be careful when you come home,” she said. “Don’t run over it.”

And ruin part of God’s creation? Never.

You should follow me on Twitter here and Facebook here.

Photos: Owen Tew's cellphone and his wife

3 views of Genesis creation conference in Birmingham, Alabama (VIDEO)

Fixed Point Foundation, which normally presents debates between atheists and Christians, is putting on a four-day conference beginning tonight on three Christian views of creation. It will be held at Briarwood Presbyterian Church in Birmingham, Alabama. If you can't make it, check back here each day for my observations. And they usually make DVDs, CDs and mp3s of their events available for sale.

Here, Fixed Point Executive Director Larry Taunton explains what the conference is about:

You should follow me on Twitter here and Facebook here.

I'm losing everything into a black hole

Well, everything I own now is getting sucked into some vortex.

I wrote a check the other day and 10 minutes later I couldn't find the checkbook. I still haven't. I never left the house so I know it's in there.

Yes, I looked the last place I was. Yes, I've retraced my steps. If one more person tells me to do those things he's going to lose his head and I'm going to lose my freedom after the sheriff finds me.

Yes, I've looked in all those places ten thousand times, and so has my wife. When I saw her open the refrigerator door I assured her "I already looked in there -- and in the freezer, too."

So don't tell me to retrace my steps. We've torn the house apart. I've even checked the garbage -- piece by piece. Just in case, we're putting the garbage out at someone else's house. Our garbage runs so early we have to put it out overnight, so I don't want anyone grabbing my checkbook -- and my one credit card, which was in there, too.

I can live without the checks and the card. I can just move on to the next batch of checks and have a new card issued. I use the card only for online purchases anyway -- and rarely even that.

They're all in the house, so nobody's going to steal them. But it's the frustration of not being able to find something you know is there.

While looking I found a receipt for the Boston butt I couldn't find on the Saturday before Memorial Day. Happily, the barbecue joint took my word for it that I had indeed bought it.

Today, I lost my camera. It's a digital SLR, not a tiny point-and-shoot. There's no reason you can't find a camera that big. I think everything's been sucked into another dimension.

And I think my virginity's in there somewhere.

You should follow me on Twitter here and Facebook here.

Photo: NASA/Chandra X-ray Observatory

On eating a watermelon

I can’t believe I’m eating watermelon in the house. Watermelon was meant to be eaten outside. Is it age making me do it, or just plain laziness?

When I was a kid we ate watermelon only outside. It’s perfect when you’ve chilled it in the refrigerator, then you cut it open and dig in – preferably with the very knife you’ve just used to slice the melon open: a big butcher knife.

When I was a kid whoever cut the melon up ate with the big knife. The rest of us got the regular knife you normally used at the dinner table for cutting your steak. When it came to watermelon eating, sometimes company would prefer a spoon or a fork, but that meant incomplete cutting and/or picking out of seeds. I wanted no part of that.

You had to eat watermelon outdoors because the juice would run down your chin and all over your hands. You’d have to go to the hose to wash off before you could even go back in the house.

Indoor watermelon eating means you are in the air-conditioning, so you are robbed of the satisfaction of that cold sweet fruit chilling your mouth and then your belly in the hot, humid outdoors, perhaps after you've just finished an exhausting day of yard work.

Indoors, you also have to be oh-so-careful not to get that juice all over you – a waste of a good melon-eating experience. (I will give in on this, though: No wasps trying to steal your melon. And no ants, either.)

The eating

If you want the purest experience, first cut out the middle part – the heart – and save it for last. It’s the sweetest. The closer you get to the rind, the less sweet it gets. And don’t put salt on it. Why in the world do people put salt on their watermelon? You wouldn’t salt an ice cream sundae, would you? Then don’t put salt on a perfectly sweet watermelon. Get some common sense.

Anyhow, even though I’ve begun eating watermelon in the house I still eat it the same way as outside, so I have to stand over the kitchen sink. I will not concede to cutting it up into little squares to be eaten later off of a plate. That’s insanity. That’s “restaurant” eating. We are not talking about eating a piece of toast or a boiled egg, here. It should be a primal experience.

When you’ve eaten as much as you want, give the rest to your dog. Dogs will eat stuff that has rotted, so they’re no connoisseurs of tastiness. They’ll think that not-so-sweet stuff next to the rind is the best stuff they’ve ever tasted – and it is, compared to month-old bird intestines they likely ate this morning.

I’m sorry about that reference. It could put you off a perfectly good watermelon. Probably not, though, considering how good it is.

I’m actually a little concerned at my proclivity of late to eat watermelon in the house. If you see me reaching for a salt shaker anytime soon, please, I am begging you, stage an intervention.

Note that even my pooch, Mollie, above, doesn't eat the rind. And what's the deal with seedless watermelon? Nothing to spit!

You should follow me on Twitter here and Facebook here.

Photos: Greg Richter Photography

Why do grown men play video games?

They used to say the only difference between men and boys is the size of their toys. I haven't heard that saying in years -- probably because men and boys now play with the same toys: video games.

A recent report cited a tripling over last year of the number of women saying they filed for divorce because their husbands spent more time on video games than they do with their wives. This survey was about divorce causes, so it didn't even count the number of men who aren't able to get wives because they play video games too much.

So, what is the right amount of time for a grown man to play video games? I would think that it would be whatever amount they could stand after their children forced daddy to play with them. I would be wrong, of course.

Full disclosure: I am 46 years old and have hated video games ever since I was a teenager. I thought my friends were insane to spend hours at an arcade hunched over a "Space Invaders" or "Frogger" machine. There seemed to be no chance of winning; all you did was see how long you could play before you lost to the machine.

I got "Pong" for Christmas one year, and quickly tired of it. I could easily beat my little sister, but never beat the computer. My dad played me a few times, but he had actual grown-up responsibilities so he wasn't much for competition.

Later games became more complex, but they weren't any more interesting -- at least to me. But lots of men as old as I am and older not only play this stuff, they're among the nuts camping out overnight to be the first to buy the newest gaming devices, which cost hundreds of dollars.

My dad can fix almost anything under the hood of a car -- at least on pre-computer models. I can't do anything but check and change the oil and keep the other fluids and tire air pressure correct. But at least I'm not driving pretend cars around pretend racetracks or running over pretend hookers for points with them.

You should follow me on Twitter here and Facebook here.

Photo: Creative Commons by tcp909